What ought?
I dont really like the holidays. I prefer the school term. Perhaps it is the expectation of the holidays. I always expect too much from it, maybe that is why, when it does not live up to the expectations, I feel sad.
The holiday has an abundance of free time. And time being so very precious, is to be grasped and cherished. Yet I do not mean to pack time 24/7 doing things. It can be grasped and cherished doing nothing, for instance. I dont want to work. Because that would be a waste of time. It is ridiculous to work just to while away time. The very thought of it is incoherent. Especially when it is such a nice chunk of time that can be cut up into however one sees fit. I also dont work because I dont really wanna trade my time for money, at least not yet.
Following this line of reasoning, it would only make sense if I am spending my time in a manner that is reasonably useful. Yet am I? The spectre of army sits over the holiday and like, sorta really poisons it. And I am a fool for letting it poison but I am weak and I cannot really help it. I really really ought to view it with proper perspective.
Watching anime, playing dota are all hollow. Sensibly speaking, I ought to devote my time to walking closer to God. Yet... I dont. I dont even seek him more. In fact, it seems I am distracted by the supposed multitude of choice and end up... not really seeking anything. Actually that is probably inaccurate since you cant not seek anything. So I probably end up seeking something less important like friendship, thrill or excitement.
Given that I have decided that meaning is tied up with my creator and that which I am created, why? Why is it so hard to lead a life in line with that which I have decided. Or have I not decided and I only say I decided? That seems to be another possibility. Of course there is also the contention of sin, defined as the basic rebellion against God not like bad deeds.
My level of discipline is awfully low and I really like, chase after butterflies in the wind. I dont even catch them. I get distracted by another. But what use are butterflies?
And my priorities, they are in disarray.
I think I agree with my Prof that the golden rule is of moral significance.
I think all families have their struggles.
I think I really wanna go to heaven ASAP.
I think communication is really important, as is mutual trust in solving any issue.
I think army is a real difficult trial.
I think that frisbee is rather fun.
I think that everyone really needs emotional support. Emotions are weak, they need support.
I think we have far to go.
I think hope is great.
I think the human spirit is incredible.
I think the amount of problems required to break a human, it is tragic. Like broken as in not the sense of God breaking us, but like a human that has given up hope.
I think the answer is to draw closer to God. It always is.
So I have been playing a single player rpg that is very much like final fantasy 2. It is called legionwood. Clocked about 18 hours game time so far? And it is active game time, not like clicker heroes lol.
It is really like a story book. An immersive story book. And like, you share in the struggle of the characters. You agonise over what equipment and what strategy to use. Think and solve the puzzles together, perhaps you fail a few time, understand the intricacies and mechanics of the game better. Sigh, and the game is gonna finish. Like when you finish a book. Ohwell.
I must declare that once again reservist is around the corner and I really rather not do reservist. I have written before but I am writing again, this conscription is really the closest thing to forced labour. It really impinges on one's negative freedom by controlling one's time and energies. Very unfree. No liberty. Of course this is on the individual level. There might be some argument that other countries might come and invade us .etc .etc but pretty sure it isn't watertight in the liberty scale while conscription directly makes us less free.
Another thing I really dislike is the waste of time. Like seriously army is such a waste of time for most of my men. Apart from the more hardworking ones who are given more important tasks, I'm pretty sure that the army would be better off and everyone would be better off if they only recall the estab of my branch rather than every person that doesn't give a shit and is chucked into my branch.
That being said, I do look forward to catching up with the people I work with. And I guess, this experience is really valuable for dealing with future sucky experiences lolol.
I think the original plan was to write an essay for every free day on any topic and perhaps, someday synthesise or review them. I think that is a rather tall order, to write a properly structured, reasonably worded essay every day. I think a more doable option is to write stuff, at least coherently organise thoughts that I have everyday. Perhaps someday (though I doubt it), there will be occasion to gather them into something larger. I also want to see if I can discern or reduce my thought to general tenets. General right tenets I presume, that I can more easily tell other people and from which, the majority or entirety of my thought can be derived. If these things can be derived, it would seem to be a .zip file, a compressed version of thought. Highly desirable.
Right right. Let me seize the day. So today's post is on mental illnesses that came out of a conversation I had with my friend. I was trying to argue that mental illnesses should not be considered as illnesses or something disease related instead, they should just be considered different.
Because this is a sensitive topic, I think a few disclaimers are in order before we begin. Firstly, I am not trivialising the suffering or disadvantages that people face when they have a mental condition. I do think that depression can be debilitating and other mental conditions do, in fact, cause much distress to the person having it and the people around them. Secondly, I am not saying that people can just "snap out" of these conditions. Like idk why I even have to say this but it seems that when people say anything skeptical about mental illnesses they are assumed to hold this but, no.
So, I think the first point is one about epistemological insufficiency. When one speaks about mental illnesses they usual mean something is wrong with the person's mind. This illness is irreducible to like the physical manifestations of it within the person's brain. I guess if one holds a purely physicalist concept and equates mental illnesses to brain illnesses then this might have some implications (though I dont think the implications are very dire). Here I must admit that I am no doctor nor scientist and I am armchair arguing almost a priori. If it so happens that depression and schizophrenia and what else IS just chemicals in the brain then this point is moot. The point here is that nobody can see into another person's mind. To say something is wrong with another person's mind seems to presuppose there being a "right" mind and then something else that is a diseased or wrong form of mind. Given that one only has first-person experience of their own mind, it is impossible to say that there is something wrong with another person's mind for one cannot, by definition, verify that to be so. This is due to two reasons, firstly, the obvious inability to directly observe another's mind. Secondly, there is no basis for comparison. What gives one the assurance that one's own mind is normal, how is there even any conception of the normal. What if all minds are unique and incommensurable? (I mean, they are given the earlier point) but yeah. This is rather forceful on the concept of "mental" illnesses. This would be evaded if one can change it to be behavioural illness or brain illnesses. If it were changed to behavioural or brain illnesses though, my position would be right. Insofar as the idea of "mental" is to be preserved, I think this is a rather strong armchair point (it sort of ignores any real-world observation right).
Secondly, what makes a disease a disease or an illness an illness? For a normal physical disease it is pretty obvious in most cases. There are observable pathogens that attack you, they kill your cells or something like that. This clearly is not the case for mental illnesses. No bacteria nor virus can be observed as the cause or necessarily related to mental illnesses. Another "class" of disease (idk, Im not a doctor, I just invent these words) is genetic such as down syndrome. In these cases (again with my limited biology knowledge), there is some mutation that leads to defective proteins or extra proteins or whatnot that leads to physical manifestations. Again, most (if not all, I am not sure) mental illnesses are not of this category. Many mental illnesses are not from birth which can be usually expected if they are genetically caused (not predisposed). So how is a mental illness an illness? It seems to be a condition that one can lapse into and recover from, accompanied by certain physical correlates which might have some causal effect such as chemicals in the brain. This is also not like, a physical injury such as losing a limb or suffering third degree burns or something (in anycase I doubt physical injury is considered a illness or disease).
So I propose, instead, that mental illnesses be just seen as mental differences. Something similar to height though the analogy is limited. People just have different mental states and one is not considered ill or healthy. Of course if the mental states itself are not considered ill does not mean that they do not lead towards behaviour that is undesirable by society. The behaviour is the issue, I think, not the mental state. The behaviour can be treated through trying to target the mental state (actually no, for there is no mental treatment right, only physical, but for ease of communication let me grant that). People that are short find it hard to join the nba and if they really really want to join the nba, they can, I dunno, seek treatment in the form of growth hormones or surgery. Similarly, if people have a certain mental state that they are unhappy with such as if it prevents them from being a socially acceptable human being and if they want to be a socially acceptable human being, by all means seek treatment and treatment ought to be given.
There is also a minor and unimportant (to me, given my project) point about stigma against illness that I will just briefly cover. Basically the thought is that illnesses are considered bad and unnatural or inferiority-conferring. So a person with an illness is considered worse off than a person without an illness ceteris paribus. This is unhelpful right. The height analogy comes into play here. A short person is not worse than a tall person unless his aim is to play in the nba. Similarly, given that people have different mental states (here I USE THE WORD STATES BUT I DONT MEAN LIKE EMOTIONAL STATES I mean like mental... conditions) does not mean that a hyperactive child is worse off than a "normal" child unless the aim is to keep quiet and study. In which case, why not change the aim rather than label the child as "ill"? Like how I dont aspire to be in the NBA. It is just like, realities. Again, the option for conscious choice is always there, like if the hyperactive child REALLY wants to study, by all means seek treatment. (though I doubt any hyperactive child wants to study lol). Perhaps choice here is much weaker given the mental influences choice-making processes but ohwell. No time to think about this.
Ther is also a less philosophical point about how depression can be faked in order to downpes for example. Like, this demonstrates that there is no foolproof indicator for mental illnesses. Not that all illnesses have foolproof indicators though I think something that can be faked very easily doesn't help.
My friend, being more medically inclined, suggested that "illness" has to be given in order for medication to be prescribed (or like drugs). Hmmm. Not so sure about that. Must something be an illness for drugs to be prescribed? Idk. I mean if it became a brain illness or like a behavioural illness together with a mental difference drugs can still be prescribed right...
Well perhaps, there is always the case that I am just ignorant of the realities of mental illnesses in that my conception of mental illnesses is wrong in which case, please do correct. This is just a theoretical piece. I still think help should be given to people if they want it even on things that are not illnesses. Right, and things like dementia I don't think have to be called mental illness, it is more a brain disease right, observable loss of brain tissue leading to associated memory loss, clear-cut enough. Similar to losing a finger or something.
Ah sigh, I just googled "is mental illness a disease" and the result is mental illness is not a disease but a disorder. Could have saved myself this attempt. LOL. But still, I think, reasonably good work. The reason given is that there are no tests that can verify any mental disorder is a physical condition. More or less what I have covered I guess.
Edit: OFC calling it a disorder is still one step higher from "difference". A disorder seems to presume some sort of norm that is susceptible to my first point.
Wrt kaz and dubai, Let me shorten the country name so it won't be so easily googleable.
So on monday, I went for a briefing.for my STEER trip, that is Study Trips for Engagement and EnRichment which is like businessy and all. Reminded me alot of my RMEP trip where we went to Dubai to learn about the country's progress and like attempts at survival. Basically alot of corporate visits, dressing nicely and all. Very nice for portfolio thingums and like, if you care about economic growth and like financial stability and that kinda stuff, especially at a more macro level of the country. Now that I have had some paradigm shifts, I no longer care about these things as much as I used to. Perhaps they are to be known for the sake of their instrumental value but not as a direct instrumental value towards those as goals in themselves.
So anyway, many countries have tried to emulate Singapore, even like trying to borrow "expertise" and ideas and whatnot. Other countries see Singapore as a model. Singapore achieved economic growth, phenomenal economic growth. Low corruption. Increased standard of living. Political and social stability. Security. List goes own and on. Other countries see this as a miracle worthy of pursuing. That is also part of the Singapore story narrative by the way, but I guess facts are facts, Singapore has done what few other countries have been able to even if they tried.
I think all these things that Singapore is good to different degrees. The question to ask is all these were obtained at what cost? Here I am not gonna advance the liberal agenda about what suppression of free press and political opponents because I think the liberal side is lame. Let me just assert that without justification for that can be a topic for another time. The question about cost is couched in terms of what are the intangible costs towards economic development. The thing im most concerned about is the social and private life cost.
Singapore has recently realised that the pursuit of economic success and the success of that pursuit has led to many unintended consequences. For example, the loss of the kampong spirit. The loss of cultural roots such as dialect. Smaller nuclear families and perhaps, weaker bonds of kinship and friends (perhaps replaced by many transactional professional relationships). For example, in the past like now, my grandparents know the shopkeepers of the shops they patronise and they have a relationship beyond that of being just a consumer and a provider. All these things enrich your life in intangible ways, ways that cannot be compensated for by material wealth. There are also things such as homegrown businesses/ small time businesses, communal problems, communal responsibilities. I think economic success was gained by making people want economic success first and then, by making them want it for themselves (and to a certain degree, for their loved ones). This made people more of a solo player instead of a co-op.
And Singapore has taken steps to remedy it or at least, try to bring back such things such as through campaigns and whatnot. Not too sure whether these countries, which presently might have these things want to give it up, then, when you are rich, attempt to buy it back with money. That isn't how it works. That is like spending your health on money and then spending money to get back health. Yeah. Perhaps not the best analogy.
And this is part of a larger discussion on on achieving what you want. Perhaps my sis is the brightest. Lower expectations do have their uses.
So this isnt exactly again, cos the first one was a draft.
I think philosophy as it is taught in NUS is...
Let me try to describe how it is taught in as objective a manner as possible for me. So most modules introduce you to some philosopher's way of thinking. They introduce who he is, his project, some criticisms, some extrapolations. You get to either read the original text (in old english or translated) or texts on the original text. Depending on the module, they either go in depth into one philosopher or spread it out. One might do some comparative philosophy seeing how thinking changes between philosophers chronologically or even draw parallels between thoughts of different traditions.
Mostly taught in an analytic form, logic is usually rather tight. You cannot make jumps that you usually would be able to in political science for example.
Honestly I think the best philosophy module thus far was social philosophy. Not because of his unorthodox teaching method which has debatable merit. I think the main thing is the focus on developing the student's own stance on the matter of governance. Which is awesome. Which I didnt do justice because I didnt think enough. Because it is hard to think about such things for long. And because I was lazy. And because I wanted good grades. And because I wanted good grades lazily. It might turn out that i flunked the essay. Ohwell.
The failures of democracy are very real whenever the candidate I favour doesnt get elected. -everyone
But seriously, rather disappointed with how the CF exco elections turned out. Frustrated enough that I left after the announcements. Perhaps not the best course of action but well...
I was hoping for a leader that I could, like, align with and yknow, see that CF improves in being centered on Christ and acting in a manner that it should. Now we have a (another?) not practical leader. We don't need dreamers nor thinkers nor prophets. It is already revealed in the Bible what we ought do. Don't need new "direction". Why keep need new "direction" and "revelation" or whatnot meh. Not already said what we as Christians ought to do ah. Not already VCF have salt and light? How does a fancy direction lead to us being salt and light? Or are we here to come up with pilgrims and poets and whatnot. Have we become poets and pilgrims and prophets and priests in the past year???
Perhaps this has something to do with the "charismatic" movement and their "direct" revelation from God about direction and whatnot after prayer and meditation (I initially wanted to put prayer and meditation in quotation marks but that would be inaccurate and not to mention wrong).
[[Book wishlist (lend me pls)]]
[[The Story Thus]]
|January 2008|February 2008|March 2008|April 2008|May 2008|June 2008|July 2008|August 2008|September 2008|October 2008|November 2008|December 2008|January 2009|February 2009|March 2009|April 2009|May 2009|June 2009|July 2009|August 2009|September 2009|October 2009|November 2009|December 2009|January 2010|February 2010|March 2010|April 2010|May 2010|June 2010|July 2010|August 2010|September 2010|October 2010|November 2010|December 2010|January 2011|February 2011|March 2011|April 2011|May 2011|June 2011|July 2011|August 2011|September 2011|October 2011|November 2011|December 2011|January 2012|February 2012|March 2012|April 2012|May 2012|June 2012|July 2012|August 2012|September 2012|October 2012|November 2012|December 2012|January 2013|February 2013|March 2013|April 2013|May 2013|June 2013|July 2013|August 2013|September 2013|October 2013|November 2013|December 2013|January 2014|February 2014|March 2014|April 2014|May 2014|June 2014|July 2014|August 2014|September 2014|October 2014|November 2014|December 2014|January 2015|February 2015|March 2015|April 2015|May 2015|June 2015|July 2015|August 2015|September 2015|October 2015|November 2015|December 2015|January 2016|February 2016|March 2016|April 2016|May 2016|June 2016|July 2016|August 2016|September 2016|October 2016|November 2016|December 2016|January 2017|February 2017|March 2017|April 2017|May 2017|June 2017|July 2017|August 2017|September 2017|October 2017|November 2017|December 2017|January 2018|February 2018|March 2018|April 2018|May 2018|June 2018|July 2018|August 2018|September 2018|October 2018|November 2018|December 2018|January 2019|February 2019|March 2019|April 2019|May 2019|June 2019|July 2019|August 2019|September 2019|October 2019|November 2019|December 2019|January 2020|February 2020|March 2020|April 2020|May 2020|June 2020|July 2020|August 2020|September 2020|October 2020|November 2020|December 2020|January 2021|February 2021|March 2021|April 2021|May 2021|June 2021|July 2021|August 2021|September 2021|October 2021|November 2021|December 2021|January 2022|February 2022|March 2022|April 2022|May 2022|June 2022|July 2022|August 2022|September 2022|October 2022|November 2022|December 2022|January 2023|February 2023|March 2023|April 2023|May 2023|June 2023|July 2023|August 2023|September 2023|October 2023|November 2023|December 2023|January 2024|February 2024|March 2024|April 2024
[[The Talk (also silent)]]
[[The Ancients]]